University of Brighton Regulations workshop for partner colleges Tanya Izzard, Partnership Manager

Aims and audience to introduce college staff to key examination and assessment regulations as set out in the General Examination & Assessment Regulations (GEAR)General Examination & Assessment Regulations (GEAR) to introduce college staff to the procedures supporting the assessment and examination process as set out in the General Examination & Assessment Procedures Handbook (GEAPH)General Examination & Assessment Procedures Handbook (GEAPH) to ensure college staff are aware of the decisions that can be made by examination boards to ensure college staff are aware of their responsibilities during the examination and assessment process for all staff at colleges involved with the examination and assessment process

Terminology modules or units – the terms are interchangeable, this presentation refers to modules modules can be: – mandatory: must be taken and passed to achieve award – compulsory: must be taken but need not be passed to achieve award – optional: need not be taken or passed to achieve award intercalation/intermission – when a student is given permission to suspend study for an agreed period

Terminology AEB and CEB – Area Examination Board (considers module results) – Course Examination Board (considers student achievement profiles) – often joint for college programmes referral: student must complete additional work to pass module, mark capped at 40 deferral: student with accepted mitigating circumstances must complete additional work to pass module, full range of marks can be awarded compensation: credit that is awarded to enable student to progress to next level or achieve award when not all modules have been passed. Failed modules remain on transcript as fails. repeat: module must be repeated in full at next opportunity. Mark capped at 40.

Fundamental regulations each programme must have a definition of stages of study and progression/award points Common Academic Framework defines Common Academic Framework – programme length – required credit values – maximum period of registration maximum credit per year – full-time students take 120 credits – 140 credits is possible in exceptional circumstances

Fundamental regulations maximum number of attempts at module assessment is FOUR: – first attempt 1 – first attempt referral 2 – repeat attempt 3 – repeat attempt referral 4 students can move from attempt 1 to attempt 3 if their attempt 1 fails and cannot be retrieved by referral referral and repeat attempts are not a right but in the gift of the examination board

Coursework submission submission deadlines must be published students who submit work late receive a mark of zero ARGEAR 2 form must be used for submission of late work ARGEAR 2 submission deadlines and late work rules need consistent implementation Student Handbook and course handbook set out these regulations Student Handbook

Extensions to deadlines ARGEAR 1 form must be used to grant extensions ARGEAR 1 Students must provide documentary evidence Good practice to identify one person per programme to grant extensions acceptable reasons for extensions include – major illness – significant personal problems – failure of University or College systems or facilities extensions are not given for – minor illness – computer/printer failure unless the fault of the University or the College – demands of paid work – transport problems

Mitigating circumstances students must submit a mitigating circumstances form (ARGEAR 3) to the chair of the examination boardARGEAR 3 staff cannot claim mitigation on students’ behalf, unless there is group mitigation (eg disturbance in exam room) students must provide supporting evidence from an independent third party claim forms and evidence must be stored securely students may claim mitigating circumstances even after an extension has been allowed, if they consider their performance was affected despite the extension

Academic misconduct academic misconduct includes plagiarism, collusion, falsification of data, duplication of previously submitted work, cheating in exams, impersonation and ghosting for full details please see – CLT has plagiarism awareness pack for use with students Centre for Learning & Teaching: – sm.htm sm.htm Turnitin available via studentcentral to check student work for plagiarismstudentcentral

Investigating academic misconduct member of staff who suspects academic misconduct reports to Course Leader/designated member of staff member of staff investigates suspicion, judging whether there is sufficient evidence to report to Head of School Head of School assesses major/minor case minor case: interview with Head of School major case: Investigating Panel including Course Leader member of staff will give evidence to panel report of outcomes to CEB recommending penalty

Examination board paperwork agenda constitution and membership minutes of last meeting details of chair’s actions completed since last meeting mitigating circumstances claims (confidential to chair) information about academic misconduct cases information on student achievement (CAMS output)

Examination board representation and attendance Faculty Academic Boards approve constitution and membership for each examination board chairs are members of UoB staff (usually Head of School or equivalent External examiner always attends appropriate College representation might include: – module leaders, who should be prepared to discuss module results and referral requirements – course leaders, who should be prepared to discuss student progression and awards – college HE managers attendance is compulsory for those named on the constitution and membership for each board

Decisions available to examination boards maximum attempts at module assessment referral – make good by reassessment, capped at 40 deferral – only with accepted mitigating circumstances compensation progress with conditions do not progress – repeat failed modules in part-time mode, capped at 40 – fail and withdraw – maximum period of registration reached

Module result decisions AEB or joint AEB/CEB will consider module results for each student outcomes of academic misconduct investigation may be considered possible module results include – pass – fail and recommend referral – fail note the threshold rule – if a component of assessment has a mark below 30, the module is failed even if the overall module mark is over 40

Progression decisions The CEB or joint AEB/CEB will consider each student’s profile of results, and may make the following progression decisions: – progress without conditions: student has passed all required modules – progress with compensation: a maximum of 20 credits can be compensated for full-time students each year. No compensation for mandatory modules – progress with conditions. Students may trail up to 20 credits into the next year of study. – endorse recommended referrals, and defer progression decision to next meeting of board – accept mitigating circumstances, agree deferral work to be completed and defer progression decision to next meeting of board – require student to slow progress and repeat failed modules in part- time mode – require student to withdraw

Mitigating circumstances decisions pre-board meetings of small group including CEB chair may review claims and make recommendations on acceptance to CEB pre-board meetings are not required but are good practice and help to preserve confidentiality mitigating circumstances can be accepted or rejected by the CEB If accepted, the board may – endorse deferral results on any failed modules, decision on progression deferred to next meeting of board – consider compensation if sufficient credit has been achieved – note acceptance if all modules have been passed – take into account when considering students at classification borderlines

Classification of awards Foundation degrees: – Passweighted average of 40 or above – Meritweighted average of 60 or above – Distinctionweighted average of 70 or above Honours degrees: – 3 rd weighted average of 40 or above – 2.2weighted average of 50 or above – 2.1weighted average of 60 or above – 1 st weighted average of 70 or above borderlines: students with an average within 2% of the next classification band can be considered for that classification by the examination board

Appeals students must indicate intention to appeal to the Secretary of Academic Board and contact chair of examination board within 15 working dates of notification of results students then have 30 days to lodge a formal appeal students cannot appeal against academic judgement valid reasons for appeals include: – mitigating circumstances not considered or student was unable to submit them for valid reasons – procedures were not followed by the examination board – regulations were breached see GEAR Section H for full details of process